Hacktoberfest 2026:维护者为十月标记出来的 issue,仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

Poor slicing performance compared to NumPy

未关闭
#84 10 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
4/5
预计耗时
3-5 天
新手友好度
25/100
Issue 类型
缺陷
描述清晰度
需要澄清
活跃度
停滞
技术栈
python
领域
performance

调研方向

首先使用 CPU 和 GPU 后端运行所提供的 Python 基准测试,重点关注 af_B[:, i]、af_B[i, :] 和 af.matmul。由于 issue 中没有指定源文件或测试,请通过 Python bindings 跟踪这些入口点,并将它们与 unsliced matmul 进行比较。当你能够重现 regression、确定其原因,并添加一个能够展示改进的 regression test 或 benchmark 时,即视为完成。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

reported by @floopcz on over here: https://github.com/arrayfire/arrayfire/issues/1428

ArrayFire slicing seems to suffer from a performance issue. Consider the following python code, that:

  • calculates the dot product of two matrices, first using NumPy, than ArrayFire
  • calculates each column/row of the dot product separately by slicing a single column/row from one of the matrices
#!/usr/bin/env python3
from time import time
import arrayfire as af
import numpy as np

af.set_backend('cpu')
af.info()

iters = 1000
n = 512

af_A = af.randu(n, n)
af_B = af.randu(n, n)

np_A = np.random.rand(n, n).astype(np.float32)
np_B = np.random.rand(n, n).astype(np.float32)

start = time()
for t in range(iters):
    np_C = np.dot(np_A, np_B)
print('numpy - dot: {}'.format(time() - start))

af.sync()
start = time()
for t in range(iters):
    af_C = af.matmul(af_A, af_B)
af.sync()
print('arrayfire - matmul: {}'.format(time() - start))

start = time()
for t in range(iters):
    for i in range(np_B.shape[1]):
        np_C = np.dot(np_A, np_B[:, i])
print('numpy - sliced dot - column major: {}'.format(time() - start))

af.sync()
start = time()
for t in range(iters):
    for i in range(af_B.shape[1]):
        af_C = af.matmul(af_A, af_B[:, i])
af.sync()
print('arrayfire - sliced matmul - column major: {}'.format(time() - start))

start = time()
for t in range(iters):
    for i in range(np_B.shape[0]):
        np_C = np.dot(np_B[i, :], np_A)
print('numpy - sliced dot - row major: {}'.format(time() - start))

af.sync()
start = time()
for t in range(iters):
    for i in range(af_B.shape[0]):
        af_C = af.matmul(af_B[i, :], af_A)
af.sync()
print('arrayfire - sliced matmul - row major: {}'.format(time() - start))

The results are following:

ArrayFire v3.3.2 (CPU, 64-bit Linux, build f65dd97)
[0] Unknown: Unknown, 15880 MB, Max threads(1) 
numpy - dot: 1.3848536014556885
arrayfire - matmul: 1.325775146484375
numpy - sliced dot - column major: 7.156768798828125
arrayfire - sliced matmul - column major: 38.87605834007263
numpy - sliced dot - row major: 7.6784679889678955
arrayfire - sliced matmul - row major: 41.27544379234314

The results suggest that with slicing, arrayfire performance is significantly degraded compared to NumPy. I have achieved similarly distributed results also with the GPU backend. Both numpy and arrayfire are linked against Intel MKL.

Am I doing something "illegal" or is it an inefficiency of the library? Thanks.

主要语言
Python
星标
422
派生
63
PR 合并指标
30 天内没有已合并 PR

贡献指南

这个仓库没有索引到贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

arrayfire/arrayfire-python 的其他 Issue

查看 arrayfire/arrayfire-python 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。